Severe sepsis and septic shock in patients transported by prehospital services versus walk in patients to the emergency department

BackgroundSepsis is a leading cause of death in the hospital for which aggressive treatment is recommended to improve patient outcomes. It is possible that sepsis patients brought in by emergency medical services (EMS) have a unique advantage in the emergency department (ED) which could improve sepsis bundle compliance.ObjectiveTo evaluate patient care processes and outcome differences between severe sepsis and septic shock patients in the emergency department who were brought in by EMS compared to non-EMS patients.MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review of all severe sepsis and septic shock patients who declared in the ED during January 2012 thru December 2014. We compared differences in patient characteristics, patient care processes, sepsis bundle compliance metrics, and outcomes between both groups.ResultsOf the 1066 patients included in the study, 387 (36.6%) were brought in by EMS and 679 (63.7%) patients arrived via non-EMS transport. In the multivariate regression model, time of triage to sepsis declaration (coeff = −0.406; 95% CI = −0.809, −0.003; p = 0.048) and time of triage to physician (coeff = −0.543; 95% CI = −0.864, −0.221; p = 0.001) was significantly shorter for EMS patients. We found no statistical difference in adjusted individual sepsis compliance metrics, overall bundle compliance, or mortality between both groups.ConclusionEMS transported patients have quicker sepsis declaration times and are seen sooner by ED providers. However, we found no statistical difference in bundle compliance or patient outcomes between walk in patients and EMS transported patients.     

An Analysis of EMS and ED Detection of Stroke

Background and Purpose: Studies have shown a reduction in time-to-CT and improved process measures when EMS personnel notify the ED of a “stroke alert” from the field. However, there are few data on the accuracy of these EMS stroke alerts. The goal of this study was to examine diagnostic test performance of EMS and ED stroke alerts and related process measures. Methods: The EMS and ED records of all stroke alerts in a large tertiary ED from August 2013–January 2014 were examined and data abstracted by one trained investigator, with data accuracy confirmed by a second investigator for 15% of cases. Stroke alerts called by EMS prior to ED arrival were compared to stroke alerts called by ED physicians and nurses (for walk-in patients, and patients transported by EMS without EMS stroke alerts). Means ± SD, medians, unpaired t-tests (for continuous data), and two-tailed Fisher's exact tests (for categorical data) were used. Results: Of 260 consecutive stroke alerts, 129 were EMS stroke alerts, and 131 were ED stroke alerts (70 called by physicians, 61 by nurses). The mean NIH Stroke Scale was higher in the EMS group (8.1 ± 7.6 vs. 3.0 ± 5.0, p < 0.0001). The positive predictive value of EMS stroke alerts was 0.60 (78/129), alerts by ED nurses was 0.25 (15/61), and alerts by ED physicians was 0.31 (22/70). The PPV for EMS was better than for nurses or physicians (both p < 0.001), and more patients in the EMS group had final diagnoses of stroke (62/129 vs. 24/131, p < 0.001). The positive likelihood ratio was 1.53 for EMS personnel, 0.45 for physicians, and 0.77 for nurses. The mean time to order the CT (8.5 ± 7.1 min vs. 23.1 ± 18.2 min, p < 0.0001) and the mean ED length of stay (248 ± 116 min vs. 283 ± 128 min, p = 0.022) were shorter for the EMS stroke alert group. More EMS stroke alert patients received tPA (16/129 vs. 6/131, p = 0.027). Conclusions: EMS stroke alerts have better diagnostic test performance than stroke alerts by ED staff, likely due to higher NIH Stroke Scale scores (more obvious presentations) and are associated with better process measures. The fairly low PPV suggests room for improvement in prehospital stroke protocols.     

Paramedic-Initiated CMS Sepsis Core Measure Bundle Prior to Hospital Arrival: A Stepwise Approach

Background: To improve patient outcomes, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented core measures that outline the initial treatment of the septic patient. These measures include initial blood culture collection prior to antibiotics, adequate intravenous fluid resuscitation, and early administration of broad spectrum antibiotics. We sought to determine if Paramedics can initiate the CMS sepsis core measure bundle in the prehospital field reliably. Methods: This is a retrospective, case series from a 3rd service EMS system model in Greenville, South Carolina between November 17, 2014 and February 20, 2016. An adult Prehospital Sepsis Assessment Tool was created using the 2012 Surviving Sepsis guidelines: 2 of 3 signs of systemic inflammatory response (heart rate, respiratory rate, oral temperature) and a known or suspected source of infection. A “Sepsis Alert” was called by paramedics and upon IV access a set of blood cultures and blood for lactate analysis was collected prior to field antibiotic administration. The Sepsis Alert was compared to serum lactate levels and ICD 9 or 10 admitting diagnosis of Sepsis, Severe Sepsis, or Septic Shock. Blood culture contamination, serum lactate, and antibiotic match were determined by in-hospital laboratory analysis. Results: A total of 120 trained paramedics called 1,185 “Sepsis Alerts” on 56,643 patients (50.3% Male, mean age 70). Patients with missing discharge diagnosis were eliminated (n = 31). The admitting diagnosis of sepsis overall was 73.5% (848/1154): Sepsis 50% (578/1154), Severe Sepsis 14.6% (169/1154), Septic Shock 8.9% (101/1154). A total of 946 blood cultures were collected in the prehospital setting, with a 95.04% (899/946) no contamination rate. Contamination was found in 4.96% (47/946). A total of 179 (18.9%) of the uncontaminated blood cultures were found to have positive growth with 720 (76.1%) having no growth. EMS administered antibiotics matched blood culture positive growth in 72% of patients. The lactate level was greater than 2.2 in 46.9% of patients. No adverse effects were reported after prehospital administration of antibiotics. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the successful implementation of an EMS-driven CMS Sepsis Core Measure bundle in the prehospital setting. Paramedics can acquire uncontaminated blood cultures, and safely administer antibiotics prior to hospital arrival among patients who were recognized as sepsis alerts.     

Prehospital sepsis alert notification decreases time to initiation of CMS sepsis core measures

Objective

To determine if prehospital identification of sepsis will affect time to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services (CMS) sepsis core measures and improve clinical outcomes.

Utilization of a multidisciplinary emergency department sepsis huddle to reduce time to antibiotics and improve SEP-1 compliance

Sepsis is a significant public health crisis in the United States, contributing to 50% of inpatient hospital deaths. Given its dramatic health effects and implications in the setting of new CMS care guidelines, ED leaders have renewed focus on appropriate and timely sepsis care, including timely administration of antibiotics in patients at risk for sepsis. Modeling the success of multidisciplinary bedside huddles in improving compliance with appropriate care in other healthcare settings, a Sepsis Huddle was implemented in a large, academic ED, with the goal of driving compliance with standardized sepsis care as described in the CMS SEP-1 measure. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed, with the primary finding that utilization of the Sepsis Huddle resulted in antibiotics being administered on average 41 min sooner than when the Sepsis Huddle was not performed. Given that literature suggests that early administration of appropriate antibiotic therapy is a major driver of mortality reduction in patients with sepsis, this study represents a proof of concept that utilization of a Sepsis Huddle may serve to improve outcomes among ED patients at risk for sepsis.     

Measuring sustainable practice change of the sepsis guideline in one emergency department: A retrospective health care record audit

Aims and objectivesTo explore the longitudinal impact of the New South Wales Sepsis guideline on time to antibiotics, triage assessment and emergency management before and four years after guideline implementation.BackgroundGlobally, sepsis continues to be a significant cause of mortality and morbidity within hospitals. To reduce avoidable adverse patient outcomes the corner stone has been to improve the early recognition and management of sepsis. The New South Wales government in Australia introduced sepsis guidelines into Emergency Departments. However, the longitudinal impact of the sepsis guideline, has never been conducted.MethodsA 12-month retrospective randomised health care record audit of adult patients with a sepsis diagnosis was conducted 12-months before and four years after implementation of the sepsis guideline.ResultsThis study demonstrated sustained improvement in allocation of urgent triage categories in the follow-up group (n = 43; 53.1%) and a reduction in the median time to antibiotics from 189 min to 102 min (p ≤ 0.001) after the implementation of the sepsis guideline.ConclusionThe study has demonstrated the sepsis guideline has improved a sustained change in early assessment, recognition and management of patients presenting with sepsis in one tertiary referral Emergency Department.     

Early recognition of sepsis through emergency medical services pre-hospital screening

BackgroundThe Surviving Sepsis Campaign implemented a 3-hour bundle including blood cultures, lactate, intravenous fluids, and antibiotics to improve mortality in sepsis. Though difficult to achieve, bundle compliance is associated with decreased hospital mortality. We predict that the implementation of an Emergency Medical Services (EMS) sepsis screening tool will improve 3-hour bundle compliance.ObjectivesTo determine if pre-hospital sepsis screening improves 3-hour bundle compliance.MethodsProspective implementation of an EMS sepsis screening tool (June 2016–November 2016) was compared to a historical control (August 2015–March 2016). The protocol was facilitated via communication between nurses and EMS personnel. The primary outcome was 3-hour bundle compliance. Secondary outcomes included time to individual bundle components.ResultsOf 135 patients screened, 20 were positive and included in the study, and subsequently compared to 43 control patients. Baseline demographics were similar, except median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was higher for the pre-EMS tool group (5 [interquartile range (IQR) 2–8] vs. 2 [IQR 1–4], p < 0.01). Three-hour bundle compliance was significantly higher in the EMS tool group (80% vs. 44.2%, p < 0.01). The pre-EMS tool group had lower median time to lactate (15 [IQR 0–35] vs. 46 min [IQR 34–57], p < 0.001), 30 mL/kg IV fluids (6.5 [IQR 0–38] vs. 46 min [IQR 27.5–72], p < 0.001), and, although not significant, antibiotics (63.5 [IQR 44–92] vs. 72 min [IQR 59.5–112], p = 0.26).ConclusionImplementation of an EMS sepsis screening tool resulted in improved 3-hour bundle compliance compared to retrospective control.     

Treatment of suspected sepsis and septic shock in children with chronic disease seen in the pediatric emergency department

BackgroundResearch demonstrates that timely recognition and treatment of sepsis can significantly improve pediatric patient outcomes, especially regarding time to intravenous fluid (IVF) and antibiotic administration. Further research suggests that underlying chronic disease in a septic pediatric patient puts them at higher risk for poor outcomes.ObjectiveTo compare treatment time for suspected sepsis and septic shock in pediatric patients with chronic disease versus those without chronic disease seen in the Pediatric Emergency Department (PED).MethodsWe reviewed patient data from a pediatric sepsis outcomes dataset collected at two tertiary care pediatric hospital sites from January 2017–December 2018. Patients were stratified into two groups: those with and without chronic disease, defined as any patient with at least one of eight chronic health conditions. Inclusion criteria: patients seen in the PED ultimately diagnosed with sepsis or septic shock, patient age 0 to 20 years and time zero for identification of sepsis in the PED. Exclusion criteria: time zero unavailable, inability to determine time of first IVF or antibiotic administration or patient death within the PED. Primary analysis included comparison of time zero to first IVF and antibiotic administration between each group.Results312 patients met inclusion criteria. 169 individuals had chronic disease and 143 did not. Median time to antibiotics in those with chronic disease was 41.9 min versus 43.0 min in patients without chronic disease (p = 0.181). Time to first IVF in those with chronic disease was 22.0 min versus 12.0 min in those without (p = 0.010). Those with an indwelling line/catheter (n = 40) received IVF slower than those without (n = 272), with no significant difference in time to antibiotic administration by indwelling catheter status (p = 0.063). There were no significant differences in the mode of identification of suspected sepsis or septic shock between those with versus without chronic disease (p = 0.27).ConclusionsStudy findings suggest pediatric patients with chronic disease with suspected sepsis or septic shock in the PED have a slower time to IVF administration but equivocal use of sepsis recognition tools compared to patients without chronic disease.     

Pharmacist driven antibiotic redosing in the emergency department

Study objectiveDetermine whether an expanded emergency medicine (EM) pharmacist scope of practice reduces the frequency of major delays in subsequent antibiotic administration in patients boarded in the emergency department (ED).MethodsA pre-post, quasi-experimental study conducted from November 2019–March 2020 at a single-center tertiary academic medical center following the implementation of an expanded EM pharmacist scope of practice. Adult patients were included if they received an initial antibiotic dose in the ED and deemed to be high-risk. Subsequent antibiotic doses were reordered by EM pharmacists for up to 24-h after the initial order pending ED length of stay (LOS). The historical control group consisted of retrospective chart review of cases from the previous year.ResultsThe study identified that of the 181 participants enrolled, major delays in subsequent antibiotic administration occurred in 13% of the intervention group and 48% of the control group (p < 0.01). When compared to the control group, the intervention group had a significant decrease in the number of delays among antibiotics dosed at 6-h (39% vs 13%) and 8-h (60% vs 8%) intervals. For antibiotics dosed at 12-h intervals, no statistically significant difference was observed between the control and intervention groups respectively (19% vs 5%). A statistically significant lower incidence of in-hospital mortality was observed in the intervention group (3% vs 11%, p = 0.02). In the intervention group, 97% of patients received subsequent antibiotic doses while boarded in the ED, compared to 65% in the control group (<0.01).ConclusionExpanding EM pharmacist scope of practice was associated with a significant reduction in the frequency of major delays in subsequent antibiotic administration as well as a decreased incidence of hospital mortality.     

Comparison of children receiving emergent sepsis care by mode of arrival

ObjectiveTo determine if differences in patient characteristics, treatments, and outcomes exist between children with sepsis who arrive by emergency medical services (EMS) versus their own mode of transport (self-transport).MethodsRetrospective cohort study of patients who presented to the Emergency Department (ED) of two large children's hospitals and treated for sepsis from November 2013 to June 2017. Presentation, ED treatment, and outcomes, primarily time to first bolus and first parental antibiotic, were compared between those transported via EMS versus patients who were self-transported.ResultsOf the 1813 children treated in the ED for sepsis, 1452 were self-transported and 361 were transported via EMS. The EMS group were more frequently male, of black race, and publicly insured than the self-transport group. The EMS group was more likely to have a critical triage category, receive initial care in the resuscitation suite (51.9 vs. 22%), have hypotension at ED presentation (14.4 vs. 5.4%), lactate >2.0 mmol/L (60.6 vs. 40.8%), vasoactive agents initiated in the ED (8.9 vs. 4.9%), and to be intubated in the ED (14.4 vs. 2.8%). The median time to first IV fluid bolus was faster in the EMS group (36 vs. 57 min). Using Cox LASSO to adjust for potential covariates, time to fluids remained faster for the EMS group (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.12, 1.42). Time to antibiotics, ICU LOS, 3- or 30-day mortality rates did not differ, yet median hospital LOS was significantly longer in those transported by EMS versus self-transported (6.5 vs. 5.3 days).ConclusionsChildren with sepsis transported by EMS are a sicker population of children than those self-transported on arrival and had longer hospital stays. EMS transport was associated with earlier in-hospital fluid resuscitation but no difference in time to first antibiotic. Improved prehospital recognition and care is needed to promote adherence to both prehospital and hospital-based sepsis resuscitation benchmarks.     

Improving door-to-antibiotic time in severely septic emergency department patients

Background

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines recommend that broad-spectrum antibiotics be administered to severely septic patients within 3 h of emergency department (ED) admission. Despite the well-established evidence regarding the benefit of timely antibiotics, adoption of the SSC recommendation into daily clinical practice has been slow and sporadic.

Study Objective

To study the impact of storing broad-spectrum antibiotics in an ED automated dispensing cabinet (ADC) on the timeliness of antibiotic administration in severely septic patients presenting to the ED.

Methods

Retrospective observational study of timeliness of antibiotic administration in severely septic patients presenting to a community ED before and after adding broad-spectrum antibiotics to the ED ADC. Data on 56 patients before and 54 patients after the intervention were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was mean order-to-antibiotic time. Secondary outcome measures included mean door-to-antibiotic time and percentage of patients receiving antibiotics within 3 h.

Results

The final analysis was on 110 patients. Order-to-antibiotic administration time was reduced by 29 min post-intervention (55 min vs. 26 min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5–45.19). Mean door-to-antibiotic time was also reduced by 70 min (167 min vs. 97 min, 95% CI 37.53–102.29). The percentage of severely septic patients receiving antibiotics within 3 h of arrival to the ED increased from 65% pre-intervention to 93% post-intervention (95% CI 0.12–0.42).

Conclusion

Storing key antibiotics in an institution’s severe sepsis antibiogram in the ED ADC can significantly reduce order-to-antibiotic times and increase the percentage of patients receiving antibiotics within the recommended 3 h of ED arrival.     

The impact of emergency medical services on the ED care of severe sepsis

Objective

The identification and treatment of critical illness is often initiated by emergency medical services (EMS) providers. We hypothesized that emergency department (ED) patients with severe sepsis who received EMS care had more rapid recognition and treatment compared to non-EMS patients.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study of ED patients with severe sepsis treated with early goal-directed therapy (EGDT).We included adults with suspected infection, evidence of systemic inflammation, and either hypotension after a fluid bolus or elevated lactate. Prehospital and ED clinical variables and outcomes data were collected. The primary outcome was time to initiation of antibiotics in the ED.

Results

There were 311 patients, with 160 (51.4%) transported by EMS. Emergency medical services-transported patients had more organ failure (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, 7.0 vs 6.1; P = .02), shorter time to first antibiotics (111 vs 146 minutes, P = .001), and shorter time from triage to EGDT initiation (119 vs 160 minutes, P = .005) compared to non-EMS-transported patients. Among EMS patients, if the EMS provider indicated a written impression of sepsis, there was a shorter time to antibiotics (70 vs 122 minutes, P = .003) and a shorter time to EGDT initiation (69 vs 131 minutes, P = .001) compared to those without an impression of sepsis.

Conclusions

In this prospective cohort, EMS provided initial care for half of the patients with severe sepsis requiring EGDT. Patients presented by EMS had more organ failure and a shorter time to both antibiotic and EGDT initiation in the ED.     

Impact of SEP-1 on broad-spectrum combination antibiotic therapy in the emergency department

BackgroundThe SEP-1 measures have tied financial reimbursement to the treatment of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of a SEP-1 initiative on the utilization of broad-spectrum combination therapy (BSCT) in the emergency department (ED).MethodsThis was an IRB-approved, retrospective evaluation of adult patients who received vancomycin plus an antipseudomonal beta-lactam for a urinary tract infection (UTI) or skin or soft tissue infection (SSTI) in the ED. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in which use of BSCT was considered appropriate based on clinical criteria. Secondary outcomes included door to antibiotic order time, door to administration time, proportion of patients continued on BSCT upon admission, duration of BSCT, and in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 400 patients were included in the analysis. Following SEP-1 implementation, appropriate use of BSCT decreased by 12%, with 54% of patients in the pre-SEP-1 group meeting clinical criteria compared to 42% in the post-SEP-1 group (p = 0.028). In the subgroup of patients with a suspected UTI the appropriate use of BSCT declined by 25% (40% vs 15%, p = 0.005). The median door to first antibiotic administration time was not significantly different between groups (63 min vs 61 min, p = 0.091).ConclusionsThe implementation of the SEP-1 mandated measures was associated with an increase in the unnecessary use of BSCT. Additionally, no difference was seen in time to antibiotic administration. The results of this study demonstrate the negative impact that the SEP-1 mandate may have on antimicrobial utilization within the ED.     

An Interdisciplinary Code Sepsis Team to Improve Sepsis-Bundle Compliance: A Quality Improvement Project

ProblemSepsis is one of the leading causes of mortality, with more than 700,000 hospitalizations and 200,000 deaths annually. Various tools exist to aid in the early identification and treatment of sepsis, including electronic alert systems, standardized order sets, nurse-initiated protocols (NIPs) and specially trained teams. Despite available guidelines, mortality rates for severe sepsis and septic shock are near 50%.MethodsThe aims of this rapid cycle quality improvement project were to develop and implement an interdisciplinary team to address early implementation of sepsis bundles in the emergency department and to compare sepsis bundle compliance 3 months pre- and 3 months postintervention implementation. The population included all patients above 18 years of age presenting to the emergency department with clinical indications of sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock. Data were collected via electronic health records (EHRs), switchboard-paging records, and a billing database.ResultsThe pre-post intervention analysis shows an improvement in time to each bundle element except antibiotics and completion of blood cultures. There were noteworthy changes in meeting bundle compliance in fluid resuscitation volume (χ² = 16.3, P ≤ 0.001): initial lactate collected within 180 min (χ² = 11.3, P ≤ 0.01) and time to second lactate within 360 min (χ² = 27.7, P ≤ 0.001). Mortality rates showed a steady decline from over 12% to 5%. No differences were found in mortality rates related to age or gender.DiscussionInterprofessional teams can use existing knowledge, skills, and tools to improve sepsis-bundle compliance and mortality outcomes in patients with sepsis presenting to the emergency department.     

Interfacility transports by emergency medical services in the United States: Estimates from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey

ObjectiveTo describe characteristics of encounters in U.S. emergency departments (EDs) brought by interfacility transport by emergency medical services (EMS) from other EDs or urgent care settings.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a multistage probability survey of nonfederal of visits to U.S. EDS. We evaluated patients who were brought to the ED as an interfacility transport by EMS from another ED or urgent care setting between 2014 and 2017. We report demographics, clinical characteristics and treatment factors of ED encounters brought interfacility transport and assessed factors associated with discharge from the receiving ED.ResultsOf 562.9 million ED encounters during the assessed period, 4.5 million were brought by interfacility transport by EMS (1.1 million per year). This represented 0.8% (95% CI 0.6–1.0%) of all ED encounters and 5.3% (95% CI 4.4–6.3%) of ED encounters transported by EMS. Most encounters brought by interfacility transport were adults (85%) who were publicly insured (62%). 39% had at least one abnormal vital sign. Most encounters received diagnostic testing (84%) and were seen within 30 min of presentation (61%). 54% were admitted, and 36% were discharged from the ED. Encounters without chronic complex conditions and with normal triage vital signs were associated with ED discharge (p < 0.01).DiscussionInterfacility transports between EDs transported by EMS account for <1% of ED encounters in the U.S. Nearly 40% of such encounters are ultimately discharged. Further research is needed to identify a low-risk cohort among patients in need of secondary transport.     

Comparing outcomes of nonoperative treatment for adhesive small bowel obstruction with and without antibiotics

IntroductionSome clinicians administer antibiotics in adhesive SBO treatment to prevent bacterial translocation without evidence confirming reduced sepsis and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of preventive antibiotic administration in nonoperative treatment of adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) in a retrospective study.MethodsUsing a Japanese national inpatient database, we identified 114,786 eligible patients with adhesive SBO and divided patients into a group who did not receive intravenous antibiotics in the initial 2 consecutive days after admission (control group, n = 71,666) and a group who received intravenous antibiotics ≥2 days after admission (antibiotic group, n = 43,120). To compare the in-hospital mortality, occurrence of sepsis, septic shock, Clostridioides difficile colitis, length of stay, and total costs between the two groups, we performed instrumental variable analyses to adjust for measured and unmeasured confounding factors.ResultsOverall, in-hospital mortality was 2.2%, and the occurrence of sepsis was 0.8%. In the instrumental variable analyses, no significant differences were found for in-hospital mortality, occurrence of sepsis, septic shock, Clostridioides difficile colitis, or total hospitalization costs. The antibiotic group showed a longer length of stay than the control group (coefficient, 1.9 days; 95% confidence interval, 0.6–3.2).ConclusionsIn this large nationwide cohort of patients with adhesive SBO, we found no benefit regarding preventive antibiotic administration in nonoperative treatment; however, antibiotic administration was associated with a longer hospital stay. These results did not support routine administration of antibiotics at admission to prevent bacterial translocation.     

Implementation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign one-hour bundle in a short stay unit: A quality improvement project

ObjectiveTo improve timely sepsis care by implementing the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign one-hour interventions.DesignTen-month prospective quality improvement project.SettingA 38-bed short stay unit within an 800-bed hospital in New York City.ParticipantsPatients admitted to the short stay unit who screened positive for sepsis.InterventionA sepsis implementation tool was created from the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. Sepsis champions delivered education on sepsis recognition, treatment, and management, and the sepsis implementation tool to the healthcare staff.Process and outcome measuresTime to first lactate, blood cultures × 2, antibiotic administration, length of stay and mortality were tracked weekly for five months.ResultsFrom May 6, 2019 to October 1, 2019, 32 patients were diagnosed with sepsis. Initial lactate and blood cultures were completed on every patient within 1one-hour of sepsis diagnosis. Administration of antibiotics within one-hour reached 100% after week four and was sustained.ConclusionUse of a registered nurse-initiated sepsis implementation tool in a short stay unit led to the completion of blood cultures, initial lactate, and antibiotic administration within one-hour. Key factors to support this practice improvement were increasing registered nurse, physician and physician assistant sepsis knowledge, registered nurse and physician/physician assistant early collaboration, increased staffing and intravenous access equipment.     

Out-of-hospital characteristics and care of patients with severe sepsis: A cohort study

PurposeEarly recognition and treatment in severe sepsis improve outcomes. However, out-of-hospital patient characteristics and emergency medical services (EMS) care in severe sepsis is understudied. Our goals were to describe out-of-hospital characteristics and EMS care in patients with severe sepsis and to evaluate associations between out-of-hospital characteristics and severity of organ dysfunction in the emergency department (ED).Materials and MethodsWe performed a secondary data analysis of existing data from patients with severe sepsis transported by EMS to an academic medical center. We constructed multivariable linear regression models to determine if out-of-hospital factors are associated with serum lactate and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) in the ED.ResultsTwo hundred sixteen patients with severe sepsis arrived by EMS. Median serum lactate in the ED was 3.0 mmol/L (interquartile range, 2.0-5.0) and median SOFA score was 4 (interquartile range, 2-6). Sixty-three percent (135) of patients were transported by advanced life support providers and 30% (62) received intravenous fluid. Lower out-of-hospital Glasgow Coma Scale score was independently associated with elevated serum lactate (P < .01). Out-of-hospital hypotension, greater respiratory rate, and lower Glasgow Coma Scale score were associated with greater SOFA (P < .01).ConclusionsOut-of-hospital fluid resuscitation occurred in less than one third of patients with severe sepsis, and routinely measured out-of-hospital variables were associated with greater serum lactate and SOFA in the ED.     

Sepsis alerts in EMS and the results of pre-hospital ETCO2

BackgroundField sepsis alerts have the ability to expedite initial ED sepsis treatment. Our hypothesis is that in patients that meet EMS sepsis alert criteria there is a strong relationship between prehospital end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) readings and the outcome of diagnosed infection.MethodsIn 2014, our EMS service initiated a protocol requiring hospitals to receive notification of a “sepsis alert” on all suspected sepsis patients. The EMS service transports 70,000 patients/year to a number of urban centers. All patients transported to our major urban teaching hospital by our EMS service in one year in which a sepsis alert was announced were included in this study. The primary outcome variable was diagnosed infection and secondary outcomes were hospital admission, ICU admission and mortality. Positive lactate was defined as >4.0 mmol/L. ROC curve analysis was used to define the best cutoff for ETCO2.Results351 patients were announced as EMS sepsis alert patients and transported to our center over a one year period. Positive outcomes were as follows: diagnosed infection in 28% of patients, hospital admission in 63% and ICU admission in 11%. The correlation between lactate and ETCO2 was −0.45. A ROC curve analysis of ETCO2 vs. lactate >4 found that the best cutoff to predict a high lactate was an ETCO2 of 25 or less, which was considered a positive ETCO2 (AUC = 0.73). 27% of patients had a positive ETCO2 and 24% had a positive lactate. A positive ETCO2 predicted a positive lactate with 76% accuracy, 63% sensitivity and 80% specificity. 27% of those with a positive ETCO2 and 44% of those with a positive lactate had a diagnosed infection. 59% of those with a positive ETCO2 and 89% of those with a positive lactate had admission to the hospital. 15% of those with a positive ETCO2 and 18% of those with a positive lactate had admission to the ICU. Neither lactate nor ETCO2 were predictive of an increased risk for diagnosed infection, hospital admission or ICU admission in this patient population.ConclusionWhile ETCO2 predicted the initial ED lactate levels it did not predict diagnosed infection, admission to the hospital or ICU admission in our patient population but did predict mortality.